Disney Could Make Another Kingsman Prequel (Even Though The Last One Bombed)
We're still waiting on a third proper entry in the "Kingsman" series (which very well may still happen), but even without the return of Taron Egerton as Eggsy, the franchise may live on in a pretty unexpected way. It was recently revealed by director Matthew Vaughn that a script for a sequel to 2021's "The King's Man," which was a prequel set during World War I, has been written. It would fulfill the promise of the first movie's wild post-credits scene and give us a "Kingsman" movie featuring Adolf Hitler as the villain.
But will it happen? Should it happen? Many questions linger at the thought of this movie becoming a reality.
"The next one is about the rise of Hitler, and how Hitler did come to power and basically was supported by the English aristocracy," Vaughn told Collider recently. The filmmaker, who also directed both "Kingsman: The Secret Service" and "Kingsman: The Golden Circle," added that they've "written it and it's pretty cool." The filmmaker also explained a bit more about the plot, in addition to revealing the possible title:
"I was like, 'well that's interesting' and how the world was worrying so much about Communism, that Fascism rose up. And I look at the world at the moment, everyone getting distracted and worrying about this [and that] and if you worry too much about [this] bad things can happen here. So it is a story that I think needs to be recalled. We're calling it The Traitor King."
For movie fans, there's lot to process there. For Disney, who now holds the reins on the franchise, there is even more to process. It all boils down to whether or not making another "Kingsman" prequel makes any sense at all, from a dollars and cents standpoint. At first glance, it certainly doesn't seem like it would. But maybe there's more to it.
One for you, one for us
The first two "Kingsman" movies were made for 20th Century Fox, and, technically, so was "The King's Man." The problem is that the film got caught up in Disney's massive acquisition of Fox's media assets back in 2019. Then the pandemic hit and the film was delayed even further. It was a messy, not-ideal situation, and four years between installments within a franchise isn't great. It finally hit theaters in December of 2021 and was straight-up steamrolled by the competition.
Vaughn's prequel was up against "Spider-Man: No Way Home" in its second weekend – a movie that eventually earned more than $1.9 billion at the box office. It also opened directly against "Sing 2" and "The Matrix Resurrections." It was a disastrous scenario. "The King's Man" ended up making a mere $37 million domestically following its horrible $5.9 million opening weekend. It topped out at $125 million worldwide against a $100 million budget. By nobody's math is that going to be considered a theatrical hit.
That said, there are other things to consider there. The pandemic was still a much larger factor at the time and it was tougher for most movies to gain any footing at the box office. Reviews were also mixed, which certainly didn't help (read our review here). All of this to say: The movie didn't get a totally fair shake.
So, might Disney be looking at the bigger picture here? Perhaps they're willing to give Vaughn another crack at it with "The Traitor King." For one, Disney could learn a lot about the true commercial prospects of the series beyond the core films. Additionally, they might view it as a good-faith move to help keep Vaughn happy, which might help them court him for future projects. It could very much be a one-for-you, one-for-us situation.
Value beyond the box office
This would not be the first time we've seen something like this happen. Earlier this year, director Kenneth Branagh got another crack at his Hercule Poirot adaptations with "A Haunting in Venice" after "Death on the Nile" bombed in early 2022. Similarly, Branagh's second Agatha Christie whodunnit was kneecapped by the Disney/Fox deal and controversy. It hasn't been a resounding success so far, but since "Haunting" had a smaller $60 million budget, it's been far from a disaster, having earned $110 million globally to date.
More to the point, the sheer fact that Disney was so quick to give the green light to "A Haunting in Venice" after "Death" bombed was very telling. At the time, it seemed to indicate more than anything that there was value in the movie beyond the box office. This has always been true for movies, but with Blu-ray sales drying up (Best Buy is getting out of the physical media game entirely) and cord-cutting accelerating, post-theatrical revenue has been harder to come by. But VOD can be a big driver of revenue, and Disney still needs high-profile movies on both Hulu and Disney+.
If "The King's Man" was a big streaming hit, then there could be financial justification for moving forward with another prequel film in the franchise. If Vaughn can keep the budget under control, Disney could release it in theaters under better conditions and, even if it doesn't make its money back in theaters, it could be positioned as a streaming play with the theatrical release bringing more attention to the film. If you make an expensive movie and release it directly to streaming, there is no revenue from ticket sales. If you make an expensive movie and put it in theaters first, there is at least some revenue to count on. It's not rocket science, but we're starting to see the industry at large embrace this line of thinking as the streaming era messily continues.
A Kingsman TV show?
There are a couple other angles to consider here. For one, a "Kingsman" movie set closer to World War II with a villain as recognizable as Hitler in the mix might have better commercial prospects, even for people who may not have felt obligated to see "The King's Man" in theaters. The other more crucial thing to consider is that Disney hasn't given the green light to this project yet. It's written, yes, but the number of scripts that are written and never produced is hilariously large.
More importantly though, "The Traitor King" may not even be a movie at all. In that same Collider interview, Vaughn explained that "The King's Man" was originally going to be a TV show set within the "Kingsman" universe, and the studio talked him into making it into a movie.
"The King's Man was originally meant to be a TV series and I got persuaded to make it as a film," Vaughn explained. "What we wanted to do was something like 'The Crown' but with espionage and a bit of a Kingsman hit going through all of the decades." So it very well could come to pass that Vaughn and Disney decide to circle back to the original idea and do the next installment as a season of TV for Disney+ or Hulu. As Disney tries to grow its streaming business, leaning into established franchises is absolutely going to continue to be a big part of the equation.
The first two "Kingsman" movies made more than $400 million worldwide each. They were big hits, and "Kingsman 3" is very much still in the cards. Vaughn is a filmmaker who makes hit movies, and Disney would probably like to be in business with him. Does this movie make sense on paper at face value? Not really. Might it make sense in the grand scheme of things? Maybe, just maybe.